Links: Home | swarblaw - law discussions

swarb.co.uk - law index


These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases.  














Defamation - From: 1200 To: 1799

This page lists 25 cases, and was prepared on 27 May 2018.

 
CASE LXXX Tr 28 El Mercer's Case Slanders, Implication, Intendment [1220] EngR 792; (1220-1623) Jenk 268; (1220) 145 ER 192 (C)
1220


Defamation
An action on the case was brought for scandalous words, and the word malitiose was wanting in the declaratiori : yet adjudged good and affirmed in error. For since they are scandalous they are eo ipso malicious.
[ Commonlii ]
 
Case VII 5 Jac Cr 162, Dame Morison's Case Slander, Report [1220] EngR 572; (1220-1623) Jenk 316; (1220) 145 ER 230 (C)
1220


Defamation
That Arscott reported that he had the use of the plaintiff's body; whereas Arscott never said so, nor ever had; by which words she lost her marriage with one A. then suitor to her, who desisted by reason of this slander. Judged actionabie, affirmed in error.
[ Commonlii ]
 
Smith's Case (1584) Cro Eliz 31; [1584] 78 ER 297
1584


Defamation
Words which have only an uncertain import or meaning are not actionable in defamation.

 
Cutler v Dixon (1585) 4 Co Rep 14b; [1585] 76 ER 886; [1585] EngR 96
1585
KBD

Defamation, Litigation Practice
"It was adjudged, that if one exhibits articles to justices of peace against a certain person, containing divers great abuses and misdemeanors, not only concerning the petitioners themselves, but many others, and all this to the intent that he should be bound to his good behaviour; in this case the party accused shall not have for any matter contained in such articles any action upon the case, for they have pursued the ordinary course of justice in such case: and if actions should be permitted in such cases, those who have just cause for complaint would not dare to complain for fear of infinite vexation." and "if actions should be permitted in such cases, those who have just cause for complaint, would not dare to complain for fear of infinite vexation."
1 Citers

[ Commonlii ]
 
Hale v Cranfield (1598) Cro Eliz 645; [1598] 78 ER 884
1598


Defamation
A pleading or declaration in a suit for slander must specify the precise words said to have been spoken.

 
Want's case (1601) Moore 628; (1601) 72 ER 802
1601


Defamation
“Et fuit tenu auxi par le Court que un libeller est punishable, comment que le matter del libel soit vray” (And was held also by the court that a libeller is punishable, even if the matter be true)

 
Brittridge's Case [1602] EngR 6; (1602) 4 Co Rep 18; (1602) 76 ER 905
1602


defamation
Mr. B. is a perjured old knave, arid that is to be proved by a stake parting the land of H Martin and Mr Wright," held not actionable, for the subsequent words qualify the first words so as to make them not actionable.
Adjective words are actioaable, if they import an act done : secus, if they import an inclination only. So words spoken adjectively are actionabIe, if they slander one in his office or trade, &c. ; as to say of a Judge, he is corrupt ; - of a clergyman, he has made a seditious sermon ; or of a merchant, he is a bankrupt knave, &c
Words prima facie imputing a felony are not actionable, if explained by subsequent words,
[ Commonlii ]
 
Scot And His Wife v Hilliar [1605] EngR 41; (1605-1611) Lane 98; (1605) 145 ER 331 (A)
1605

Hutton Sgt
Defamation
Action for slander for accusing the plaintiff's wife that she would have cut her husband's throat, and did attempt to do it. Held: No action lay for the words, 'she would have cut her husband's throat', but that an action was maintainable for the remaining words which charged an attempt
1 Citers

[ Commonlii ]
 
De Libellis Famosis (1606) 5 Co. Rep. 125a
1606


Defamation, Ecclesiastical
(Star Chamber) it was an offence to defame the deceased Archbishop of Canterbury.

 
Holt v Astgrigg (1608) Cro Jac 184
1608


Defamation
The plaintiff complained of the words “Sir Thomas Holt struck his cook on the head with a cleaver, and cleaved his head; the one part lay on the one shoulder and the other on the other”. Held: It was moved in arrest of judgement that the words were not actionable, because it was not averred that the cook was killed, but argumentative.

 
The Earl of Northampton's Case (1613) 12 Co Rep 134
1613

Coke
Defamation
If A publishes that he heard B say that C was a traitor, he will not be liable if he proved he actually heard B say this. A would be liable only if he did not identify the original author.

 
Lovet v Hawthorn [1653] EngR 1261; (1653) Cro Eliz 834; (1653) 78 ER 1060 (B)
1653


Defamation
An innuendo in an action of slander, cannot superinduce a fact, which, if true, would alter the nature of the offence imputed to the plaintiff.
[ Commonlii ]
 
Levermore v Martin [1653] EngR 1226; (1653) Cro Eliz 297; (1653) 78 ER 550 (A)
1653


Defamation
In slander the words must be proved as they are laid.
[ Commonlii ]
 
Lacy v Reynolds [1653] EngR 1172; (1653) Cro Eliz 214; (1653) 78 ER 470 (C)
1653


Defamation
In an action for words, the relative fact must he positively averred.
[ Commonlii ]
 
Penn and Mead's case (1670) 6 St Tr 951
1670


Defamation

1 Citers


 
Smith's Case [1675] EngR 1528; (1675) March NR 7; (1675) 82 ER 387
1675


Defamation
One said of him, Thou art forsworn, and hast taken a false oath at Hereford Assises, against such a one, naming the party. Arid the opinion of the Court (the Chief Justice and Justice Crooke being absent) was against the action. But they conceived that the action would have lied, if the defendant had said, Thou art forsworn, and hast taken a false oath at the Assises, against such an one, with averment that he was sworn in the cause.
It was said at the Bar, that it was adjudged in this Court in Appletons case, that where a man said unto another by way of interrogatory, Where is my piece thou stolest from me? that it was actionable. Justice Jones remembred this case, where one said, J. S. told me, that J. N. stole a horse, but I do not believe him. This with averment that J. S. did not say any such thing, would bear an action. Justice Barkley said, that an action was brought upon these words, You are no thief? and that these words with averment, which imply an affirmative, will bear an action.
It was said to a merchant, that he was a cousening knave. And the opinion of the Court was, (the Chief Justice and Justice Crooke being absent) that the words were not actionable, because he doth not touch him in his profession, for the words are too general : but it was said, that to call him bankrupt was actionable. And in all cases where a man is touched in his profession, the words are actionable. But to call a lawyer a bankrupt, is not actionable. Justice Jones said, that Serjeant Heath brought an action for these words : one said of him, that he had undone many ; and it was adjudged actionable ; because he touched him in his profession.
Kingston upon Hull is a particular and limitcd jurisdiction, and they held plea of and which was made out of their jurisdiction ; and thereupon a capias was awarded against the obligor, who was arrested upon it, and suffered by the sheriff to escape : and the opinion of the Court was clear, that no escape would lie against the sheriff, upon the difference in the case of the Marshalsea, that if the Court hold plea of a thing within their jurisdiction, but proceed erroneously, that it is avoidable by error ; but if they have not jurisdiction of the cause, all is void, and coram non judice. 11 H. 4. and 19 E. 4. acc. So in the principal case : for they held plea of a thing which was out of their jurisdiction, and therefore the whole proceeding being void, no action can lie against the sheriff, for there was no escape.
[ Commonlii ]
 
Townshend v Hughes (1676) 2 Mod 159
1676


Defamation
In a defamation action, the impugned words are to be understood "according to the general and natural meaning, and agreeable to the common understanding of all men."
1 Citers


 
Rex v Penny 91 ER 999; (1687) 1 Ld Raym 153
1687


Defamation, Crime
Spoken words defamatory of a private person were held not to be a crime.

 
Rex v Read (1708) Fortescue 98
1708

Holt CJ
Defamation, Ecclesiastical
A prosecution for the publication of obscene matter was an issue for the ecclesiastical courts.

 
Curl's Case (1727) 2 Stra 788; ER 899
1727


Defamation, Crime
Obscene libel was recognized as an offence at common law.

 
Naben v Miecock [1728] EngR 299; (1728) Skin 183; (1728) 90 ER 84 (B)
1728

Jones CJ, Levinz J, Charlton J
Defamation
(1683?) The plaintiff brought an action sur case for these words, Thou art a clipper, and thy neck shall pay for it ; upori a motion iri arrest of judgment, Jones Chief Justice, Levinz and Charlton were of opinion, that the words were actionable ; for though clipper is general, and may be intended a clipper of wool, citoth, &c. yet the following words per Jones and Charlton shew it to be intended of clipping, for which he shall be hanged, arid that thy neck shall pay for it, implies as much. Levinz held, that whether thy neck shall pay for it, implies as much as thou shalt be hanged, or not, or only that he shall he set in the pillory; yet that it was a scandal, and actionable: and he said, he was for encouraging actions for words, and for taking words in their natural, genuine and usual sense, and common understanding, and not according to the witty constructions of lawyers, but according to the apprehension of by-standers, &c. and words are the rather to be made actionable, for that a verbis ad verbera is usual, and men will right themselves by force, wheti they cannot be righted by law ; not yet that every idle word will bear as son of a whore, rascal, &c and the reason thereof is, for that the by-standers see them to be words of heat, and so the cause is visible ; but when such things are laid to one's charge, whereof a by-stander cannot know whether he is guilty, or not ; and yet are maliciously said when he is not guilty, these ought to be incouraged: and a case lately adjudged between Wallker and Beatvour was cited, where the words were, Thou art a clipper, and shalt be hanged ; which were adjudged to be actionable.
1 Citers

[ Commonlii ]
 
Colman v Godwin [1782] EngR 56; (1782) 3 Doug 90; (1782) 99 ER 554 (A)
4 May 1782

Bulller J
Defamation
Words imputing a crime are actionable, although they describe it in vulgar language, and not in technical terms.
1 Citers

[ Commonlii ]

 
 Rex v Shipley; Rex v Dean of St Asaph; 1784 - (1784) 21 St Tr 847; (1784} 4 Doug KB 73; (1784) 99 ER 774; (1784) 3 Term Rep 428n

 
 Fleetwood v Curley; 1792 - [1792] EngR 838; (1792) Hob 267; (1792) 80 ER 413
 
Jones v Herne [1799] EngR 245; (1799) 2 Wils KB 87; (1799) 95 ER 701 (A)
1799


Defamation
'You are a rogue, and I will prove you a rogue, for you forged my name," are actionable.
[ Commonlii ]
 
Copyright 2014 David Swarbrick, 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire HD6 2AG.